MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921835525 · doi:10.1017/s2071832200021763

Safety Valves and Complete Exits in European Treaty Politics

2016· article· en· W2921835525 on OpenAlexaff
Will Phelan

Bibliographic record

VenueGerman Law Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean Union Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTreatyEuropean unionPoliticsPolitical scienceLaw and economicsInternational tradeMember statesSafeguardLawPolitical economyBusinessSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is common to describe the European Union as “new,” “unique,” “sui generis,” and hard to fit into existing categories of institutional arrangements, national or international. Indeed, debates on how to describe the EU are often lively and sometimes illuminating. In concrete terms, however, one of the best ways to understand the EU's distinction from other forms of treaty-based trade and integration regimes is the EU's distinctive lack of unilateral safeguard and escape valve mechanisms available to policy-makers in the various Member States.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.039
Scholarly communication0.0210.019
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0120.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.276 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGerman Law JournalSame topicEuropean Union Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207